GRAIN OF SALT: Wikileaks Iraq shooting video is dangerous for all

One of the most explosive instances of U.S. military overreach is the torture and murder of prisoners at Abu Ghraib. When confronted with embarrassing and damaging cases of abuse, the Pentagon repeatedly decided to sweep everything under the rug and pretend it never happened.

A few lower level soldiers were sold out as scapegoats, but those responsible escaped any accountability for their actions. It was, rightly, an international embarrassment that unfortunately has yet to be remedied.

Accountability is always important. But a video surfaced last week that should rival Abu Ghraib in the embarrassment we should all feel with what occurs in our name and the results of not holding people responsible.

Wikileaks, a Swedish-based organization that specializes in publishing government materials while preserving the anonymity of the whistleblowers, released a video that shows an attack that took place in July of 2007. To see the video, go to YouTube and search "wikileaks collateral."

To briefly summarize, the American crew of an AH-64 Apache helicopter fired upon a group of Iraqi civilians in Baghdad with a 30mm cannon, despite the civilians not having committed a single hostile action. When a van pulled up to the scene to try to aid a wounded man, the chopper proceeded to fire upon the van, killing even more people and severely wounding two small children inside.

By firing on non-hostiles, the first attack is a violation of the military's rules of engagement. By firing on the wounded and those coming to their aid, it's a violation of the Geneva Convention, as well as murder and a war crime that should not go unpunished. Unfortunately, all investigations into the incident were halted.

Among the dead were two employees for Reuters. Since the attack, Reuters has tried to obtain an explanation from the U.S. government as to why its employees were murdered, but it was stonewalled. When asked last week to comment on the story, the Pentagon declined, stating that their copy of the video had been "lost."

The Pentagon made excuses at the time, stating that, although they were all civilians, the group was seen at the time as a threat, or that the van was not clearly marked as a medical assistance provider.

Keep in mind; this is 2007 Baghdad. Iraq is a disaster, security is non-existent, and the city is being ethnically cleansed. While different factions fight for control, civilians are being pulled out of their homes and attacked simply for being of a different religion than their neighbor.

It therefore makes perfect sense for the average Iraqi to want to be armed so as to be able to defend themselves or their family, especially in a war zone. Making excuses may appease the commanders, but they won't matter to those who live there and are affected by this.

The two little girls almost killed aren't going to care about our intentions after seeing family members blown up by cannon fire right in front of them for the horrible crime of trying to help a wounded civilian. How do we "win the hearts and minds" of the people when they're being killed by our recklessness? Is it not conceivable that this could persuade them to take up arms against us?

This event is not an accusation that all our servicemen lust for blood; instead is a strong indictment on those who decided it was a good idea to put our serviceman in this position in the first place.

When our leaders put our soldiers in positions they shouldn't have been put in, such as in Iraq, accidents and instances of extreme recklessness are bound to happen. And when accountability is rejected so some of us can be saved some embarrassment, it doesn't just put our soldiers in danger. It puts all of us in danger as well.


Comments

More from The Daily






This Week's Digital Issue


Loading Recent Classifieds...